United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2021

Luna v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

Luna v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided August 17, 2021
Luna v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

Trial Court Opinion

DAVID ALLEN (SBN 87193)

DAVID ALLEN & ASSOCIATES

5230 Folsom Boulevard

Sacramento, California 95819

Telephone: 916-455-4800

Facsimile: 916-451-5687

Attorneys for Plaintiff

COLLEEN LUNA

MISTY A. MURRAY (SBN 196870) [email protected]

HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP

350 South Grand Ave., Suite 3600

Los Angeles, CA 90071-3476

Telephone: 213-680-2800

Facsimile: 213-614-7399

PETER J. FELSENFELD (SBN 260433) [email protected]

HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP

One California Street, 18th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: 415-362-6000

Facsimile: 415-834-9070

Attorneys for Defendant

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

COLLEEN LUNA, ) Case No. 2:21-cv-00733-WBS-KJN )

Plaintiff, ) (Hon. William B. Shubb) ) vs. ) JOINT REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION ) OF PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE ) ORDER

COMPANY, et al., ) )

Defendants. ) Complaint Filed: April 24, 2021 ) ) )

STIPULATION

Plaintiff Colleen Luna (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“Defendant”) (collectively the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby jointly request that the Court modify the current Pre-Trial Scheduling Order as follows: WHEREAS, on August 2, 2021, the Parties submitted their Joint Case Management Statement (“CMS”). (Dkt #11) As stated in the CMS , this case involves a claim for long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits under an employer-sponsored plan. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s claim is governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq.

WHEREAS, in the CMS, the Parties proposed certain modifications of the standard pretrial proceedings, including that the case be resolved by way of Cross Motions for Judgment pursuant to FRCP 52 to be determined by the Court based upon the Administrative Record and without live testimony or expert witnesses. The Parties further proposed a briefing schedule with opening briefs, responding briefs, and no more than a half-day bench trial. Finally, the Parties agreed to waive the Final Pretrial Conference and its attendant requirements.

WHEREAS, on August 3, 2021, the Court issued a Pre-Trial Scheduling Order (Dkt#12), which set a Final Pre-Trial Conference for August 1, 2022 and further required that “Counsel for all parties are to be fully prepared for trial at the time of the Pretrial Conference, with no matters remaining to be accomplished except production of witnesses for oral testimony.” The Order further stated that “Counsel shall file separate pretrial statements” and “referred to Local Rules 281 and 282 relating to the contents of and time for filing those statements.” (Dkt#12)

WHEREAS, the Court also set Trial for October 4, 2022 in accordance with the procedures set forth in Kearney v. Standard Ins. Co., 175 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 1999) (ERISA cross motions). However, the Order does not establish a schedule for Cross Briefing under Rule 52.

NOW THEREFORE, the Parties respectfully jointly request that the Court modify the Pre- Trial Scheduling Order as follows: • Strike the Final Pre-Trial Conference set for August 1, 2022 and its attendant • Set a Status Conference for August 1, 2022 for purposes of scheduling a Settlement Conference as set forth in the Court’s Order (Dkt#12) • Set the following Cross Briefing Schedule for the Trial of this matter: o Deadline to file Opening Rule 52 briefs: September 6, 2022 o Deadline to file Responsive Rule 52 briefs: September 20, 2022 o Hearing on Cross Motions for Judgment: October 4, 2022 The requested modification will not affect any other deadlines or requirements set forth in the Pre-Trial Scheduling Order.

Respectfully submitted by,

Dated: August 13, 2021 DAVID ALLEN & ASSOCIATES

By: /s/ David Allen

DAVID ALLEN

Attorneys for Plaintiff

COLEEN LUNA

Dated: August 13, 2021 HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP

By: /s/ Peter J. Felsenfeld

MISTY A. MURRAY

PETER J. FELSENFELD

Attorneys for Defendant

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY

FILER’S ATTESTATION

In compliance with Local Rules, I, Peter J. Felsenfeld, hereby attest that all party signatories hereto concur in this filing.

/s/ Peter J. Felsenfeld

PETER J. FELSENFELD

ORDER

Having reviewed the parties Stipulation to Modify the Pre-Trial Scheduling Order in the ERISA-governed matter, and for GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that the Court the Pre-Trial Scheduling Order (Dkt#12) shall be modified as follows: e Strike the Final Pre-Trial Conference set for August 1, 2022 and its attendant requirements e Set a Status Conference for August 1, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. for purposes of scheduling a Settlement Conference as set forth in the Court’s Order (Dkt#12) e Set the following Cross Briefing Schedule: o Deadline to file Opening Rule 52 briefs: September 6, 2022 1] o Deadline to file Responsive Rule 52 briefs: September 20, 2022 o Hearing on what the parties have characterized as Cross Motions for Summary Judgment, which will in fact be the final hearing on the merits pursuant to the procedures set forth in Kearney v. Standard Ins. Co., 175 F.3d 15 1084 (9th Cir. 1999): October 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m.

The requested modification will not affect any other deadlines or requirements set forth in the Pre-Trial Scheduling Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. / .

Dated: August 16, 2021 Ph hata Vim Lehn

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.